What Chris said, but if you want to try them, I made two: one with "native" white levels and one targeting D65. Download them both here: images.anandtech.com/reviews/mobile/2013/Acer-V7-LCD.zip
The "Native" is less accurate but you don't lose maximum brightness, which can be important on a laptop.
That's not quite an accurate comparison when it comes to laptops. The out of the box calibration on laptops is generally so bad that even copied settings offer you much improved performance. Especially since there are no OSD controls and it's all done in software. You just have to make sure that it is, in fact, the same panel.
I winced at reading the part about "Torx screw silliness". What would you have preferred? The ubiquitous, shitty philips-head screws that cam out and are a massive pain in the ass to remove if overtorqued? I think that using torx deserves praise, not criticism.
+1 as I recently had to disassemble my old Dell Precision and one of the screws was too tight so it got damaged (the screw head hole is shallow compared to the screwdriver) and it starts to become almost impossible to remove (have to use a flat head screwdriver, but there's less and less to grab on).
Regarding the side button issue, when I use an external display with my Precision, I often wish it had a side button to turn it on..
Yes! Torx screws are better given the same physical size, and the screwdrivers aren't exactly expensive or anything. I'd much rather have to spend an extra five minutes finding a Torx driver than strip out a friggin' Philips.
In 2011, I bought a laptop that weights 1.7kg and has a 35W TDP CPU, and as a result, the CPU and the integrated graphics could actually both boost at the same time. Now we're being offered 1.9-2.5 kilo laptops with 17W CPUs and rather inconsistent performance, especially in games. It seems silly, especially since the idle power consumption is the mostly same and the prices, at least for Ivy Bridge, were mostly similar.
I think Jarred (and many other ethusiasts) have huge expectations from the displays. Sure, everybody wants 1080p (or higher) IPS displays, but at what cost? Let's not forget that many people don't have many thousands of dollars per month in order to afford such beautiful displays/products. For example, why should'nt be enough an 720p or IPS panel on a 14 or 15 inch laptop? I remember back in 2007 I had an 15,6 inch Fujitsu laptop with a 1280x800 pixels. It wasn't great at all, but it was getting the work done. Remember, a greater display resolution demands much more from the graphichs, and that leads to bigger power consumption. More doesn't always mean better. Regards,
A better display is simply _the_ worthwhile upgrade in the era of "good enough" computing. I have a Sandy i3 laptop and a Core 2 Duo desktop, and since I do not much game (or convert videos/run scientific simulations), I still do not feel a need to upgrade my CPU (I do have fast storage and lots of RAM). More and more I've been catching myself on the thought that my next upgrade might be a ~24'' monitor with high DPI, if one arrives for a reasonable price. With the laptop it is similar – it does everything it is asked to, so the only incentive to upgrade is either a way better screen (better colors and high DPI), or the same performance and OS support in a tablet/phone sized package.
Nevermind the resolution, a poor TN is a horrible thing. I'd want laptop makers to use *decent* TNs as minimum, though really I'd prefer something better than TN (with decent response pixel times).
I recently got an Asus 15.6" laptop (500-600$ in the US). The TN screen is horrendous. The specs say it's something like 15+30 degrees vertically, but that's a lie. It's more like 0 degrees. There's no single angle where you can see the whole screen undistorted. Maybe if you watch it from 2-3 meter away. Horizontal angles aren't good either, but are less of a problem. I wonder why they don't rotate the panel 90 degrees, as vertical is more important in laptops. The 6-bit dithering is not difficult to notice. The pixel response time isn't too good. And looking at technical specs, it seems there are even worse TN screens being made!
Now, you can get such panels on eBay for about $50. That's for a very poor 6-bit 1366x768 TN. For $150 you can get a 15.6" 1920x1080 S-IPS 10-bit. $100 difference in end user price going from super poor to very good:
BTW, I didn't say anything about contrast because I don't know what it is. The contrast is variable across the screen (mostly vertically), as are the colors (is this pink or orange? is it dark purple or light? is there a vertical gradient here or is it a solid color?).
I don't think Jarred expects people to buy laptops monthly let alone every year so investing in a nicer screen is still reasonable.
When the asking price for the laptop is $1300, 1080 would seem to be expected. Touch is a nice extra. Generally Anandtech will scale their screen expectations according to price. They do have a high emphasis on screen though. They generally only okay TN panels if they are the really good ones or the laptop is clearly budget targeted.
In this time, it might be hard to get a 1280x720 or 1280x800 IPS screen at 14 inch. The panel manufacturers might not bother with it any more.
While your old laptop may have had a crap display - many others had old laptops which did not. I have a laptop from 2004~ that has a 15" 1920x1200 screen, a Dell Precision which also has a 15" 1920x1200 screen, an old Dell with a 1400x1050 14".. etc.
My favourite laptop and the one I'm on right now is a Sony Vaio Z12, 13.3" 1600x900, and so light. But I added the previous examples to show that some people have ALREADY had higher res screens, and are bewildered that options lack today.
I think the screen on this particular Acer is probably just fine - once calibrated, so they probably should do that from the factory - but I honestly would love to drop the touchscreen entirely, and have a matte finish. But that's me. It would even save some money.
"The V7-582PG-6421 has a 15.6” 1080p IPS display, but the CPU is a Core i5-4200U and the GPU is a rather questionable GT 720M"
I've been considering this model mainly because of the larger display, which only adds 0.5 lbs to the weight, and my eyes aren’t what they used to be so the extra screen real estate is needed. It would be great if it were as light as some previous generations of the Samsung Series 9, but you can’t have everything.
Taking into account the following use cases, will the lower CPU & GPU specs on the 6421 really make a difference to me?:
At home office (connected to an external 24” monitor): - Word, Excel, Powerpoint - email - web browsing - occasional hobbyist use of 3D Home Architect
On the road: - Word, Excel, Powerpoint - email - web browsing - watching videos on flights
While display size at home is irrelevant since I have the external monitor, I find that my current laptop with a 13.3” display doesn’t cut it (for me) on the road when working with the MS-Office suite. Since the laptop is nearly 4 years old and starting to give me some problems, the timing of the new Haswell-based laptops is spot on and I’m looking to get one by the end of the year. Right now there just doesn’t seem to be too many options for a new generation (processor & touchscreen) 15” minimal-compromise ultrabook at a decent price. Calling the V7-582PG-6421 an ultrabook might be a stretch, but it weights the same as my current smaller-screen laptop so it’s acceptable.
Should I be waiting for something else that’s just on the horizon? Are there other alternatives to the V7-582PG-6421 that I should be considering?
I'd personally bet you don't even need the dGPU. I'd consider picking up an ultrabook with the right size screen and screen res.
I can't judge 3D Home Architect but based on what I'm seeing it seems legacy. I think iGPU graphics should handle it just fine, and again, a dGPU would be wasted.
I'd strongly recommend picking a Haswell-only model, though I'd consider waiting to see what Haswell with Iris HD Pro brings (power consumption).
One last question though: what screen res is that 24 inch monitor? 1920x1080 will be fine (and I don't think much else exists at that screen size) but I wonder how well 1440p would run off an iGPU (probably not that well).
Yeah, what lmcd said. For the applications you're running, the dGPU isn't needed -- it's just taking space and perhaps a little bit of power. I'd estimate the 720M is only about 30-50% faster than the HD 4400, so if you could get something with HD 5000 the gap would be even smaller. We've got a laptop with Iris Pro 5200 Graphics inbound, but the cost may be too high relative to Optimus models to make it worthwhile.
Of course, if you can't find another laptop with a decent 1080p display for less than $1050, the 15.6" V7 isn't terrible -- it's just not as good (IMO) as the smaller V7.
I'm assuming that's a 47W quad you've got coming from the SKUs I've seen, but any insights into when we'll see the dual core 28W HD 5100 parts? My wallet is begging to be abused by a very portable machine that can last 12 hours in light duty and still play most current games (~720p/low). Preferably before my next flight to India :/.
Thanks for the feedback. Since I'm giving myself to the end of the year for making the purchase, I'll throw this one into the spreadsheet that I'm using for evaluating alternatives.
The monitor res is 1920x1080 as you suspected which, for what I do, is just fine.
I'd agree that the iGPU is fine for 90% of what I do so that definitely makes it good enough. Nevertheless, that last 10% (3D Home Architect) can be frustrating at times. My current laptop has a Core i5 M430 and a GeForce 310M. Doing a 3D walkthrough of complex drawings is very choppy.
According to various things I've read online, that port on the back may or may not be a Mini DisplayPort. Are you able to test if it is and if 2560x1440 output is possible? I've been considering this computer, but connecting it to my U2711 is important to me. Thanks.
Sadly, I don't even had a DisplayPort capable LCD, let alone one with 1440p support. I've been using a couple older 30" DL-DVI displays for years, and have no reason to upgrade yet (and no space for another display). Acer calls it a mini-VGA, but you need an adapter for that, and apparently they also support a few other things with the port via adapters. But they do not guarantee displays will work. This is all based on information from the R7 though -- they don't have a spec sheet for the V7 posted yet, oddly enough.
Personally, for gaming, moving away from native resolution is the worst thing you can do. The Razer 14 even with it's questionable panel is in a different league for gaming concerns.
Jarred, your reviews are the only ones I've really come to trust as I'm shopping for a new laptop. Thanks for the level-headed subjective analysis combined with the well-analyzed raw data. Whatever compensation you get for doing these reviews... it should be more!
The only thing that is stopping me from snagging this laptop right now is that the specs on the (ever?) forthcoming Gigabyte p34g and p35k look compelling-- like the V7 on steroids without the touchscreen. What's the "major flaw" that you're concerned about with those? I, and I'm guessing many others, would be interested in your assessment. I'm guessing price, heat, battery life, and availability are the likely "gotchas." Thanks!
Build quality is an unknown, as is battery life and some other factors, but the bigger issue is that you just can't get it yet, at least in the US. I need to ping Gigabyte and see what's up, as the only place I can find it in the US says, "This product is not available and cannot be purchased. It has been discontinued by the manufacturer or vendor." But it might simply be in the pre-release phase.
This might be another obnoxious case of the various country models being different.
Also, thanks Jarred for the response. The "Gigabyte NB" facebook page keeps talking about early september availability for the p34g-- later for the the p35k-- but I'm trying to not hold my breath.
Been looking forward to this review ever since you mentioned it was coming, in your R7 review. I believe this particular SKU is seriously overpriced. The model available on the US ncix website comes with an i5-4200U, GT 750m 4GB,same 1080p IPS touchscreen and 500GB + 24GB storage for $899. To me this is a far better value proposition than the $1300 model. The i5 might be a bottleneck in some games but its not going to be too different from the i7.
Comparing this to the Asus N550 and I feel that the N550JV-DB72T is a far better deal with an i7-4700HQ, same GT 750m (2GB), 1080p IPS touchscreen,all aluminum body, max 16GB RAM and 3 USB 3.0 ports. Although the Acer has an msata slot for ssd's, the Asus has an optical drive where the mechanical drive can be put while a 2.5" ssd occupies the main HDD slot. Weight and thickness favour the Acer but I'm willing to accept that. The Acer is $1066 for the touchscreen version and $969 for the matte non touch. Absolute no brainer.
The ASUS N550 does weigh about 1.5 pounds more, let's not forget that, and it looks like the same basic design as the N56JV, which was good but still rather bulky, with more plastic in the chassis. If you're after something with higher performance than the V7, there are many options out there; if you want what is basically a gaming Ultrabook that can handle any moderate task you might throw at it, I think the V7-482PG strikes a nice balance. I would like to have the option for a 1080p matte non-touch if it could save $150, but sadly there isn't one.
Funny enough, the NCIX version of the V7 is apparently a Canadian model (http://store.acer.com/store/acerna/en_CA/pd/ThemeI... This is one of the frustrating things with Acer, ASUS, and a lot of other OEMs: they have good SKUs that are only released in specific markets, and often I can't figure out why. I've never tried ordering from NCIX before, but for $899 (though it's backordered), the V7-482PG-6662 is basically giving you a slower CPU, smaller HDD and less RAM for $400 less. Of course, that's a "street price" and I suspect the 9884 street prices might end up in the $1100-$1200 range, making it a more reasonable upgrade.
Congrats to Acer for reversing course on the "race to the bottom". RTTB
Sadly, it might be another 10 years for me before the name Acer doesn't resonate with garbage. They will, and should, suffer for a build-em-and-sell-em-cheap strategy. I'm not convinced.
I was wondering, given that the processor, despite being an i7, is still a ULT processor, and not even a quad-core, will this not be a limiting factor to the graphics card and will this laptop be able to render graphically challenging games?
The majority of games still don't really need more than one or two CPU cores, and with Turbo Boost you're still able to hit 2.7-3.0GHz on the i7-4500U. With a faster GPU it would be more of a bottleneck, but the GT 750M is clearly tapped out in most titles already, at least at our Mainstream settings. (You'll notice that overclocking the GPU RAM didn't help on the Value settings, but that could be more the GPU core not needing more RAM than a CPU bottleneck; I'd have to investigate more to say for certain.) I think a GTX 765M would probably be where we see the shift to being CPU bound with a ULT processor, but even then you can usually get >40FPS from the CPU if the GPU can manage, so you can turn up details to compensate if you had a faster GPU.
This is where the MSI GX60 runs into problems with some games, as single-threaded performance of the A10 APUs is still significantly slower than even the ULV/ULT parts. It's pretty sad that an Ultrabook with a much slower GPU can outperform it in several of the games, even at Mainstream detail.
I guess I'm just a computing dinosaur... I do almost all my work on desktops, and while I love a laptop as a backup portable work/netflix/whatever box, I just can't stomach the thought of spending $1k+ on one.
My 2.5 year old $450 HP Probook 4430s may have a fugly screen and not be the thinnest or fastest thing out there, but I can't see replacing it anytime soon for how I need to use a laptop.
Guess that makes me a bit of a dinosaur too... Or just a geek and a gamer, I've been thinking of getting a laptop for a while to replace an aging netbook but between my desktop and my tablet I tend to use the netbook a whole lot less than I used to...
And I wouldn't be happy with a budget laptop (let alone another netbook) if it weighed half a dozen pounds or had a crap screen (not after getting 3x24" IPS displays for the desktop and looking at the new Nexus 7 display...). Work needs might eventually force my hand tho, and while I'd like a system like this Acer I'd probably opt for something slightly cheaper/lighter without a dGPU.
Good review. Thank you. Please stop saying "the only company that can get away with charging Apple prices is Apple".
It's stupid and insulting. It's insulting to Acer and the other manufacturers to imply that they don't deserve proper margins for developing good products. It's insulting to consumers to imply that most of them are not discerning enough to pay what a good product is worth. It's insulting to Apple to imply that they somehow "get away" with making more than subsistence profits for building good products. It's insulting to Apple product users to imply that they're been fooled into paying more than rock bottom prices for good products.
So just stop with this BS and admit that Mac and PC hardware offer largely the same value for money.
You can say "it's insulting" all you want, but that doesn't make it true. The reasons for why Apple can charge more are numerous, but just to cover a few:
1) Brand recognition 2) Good products 3) Unique OS 4) An ecosystem that many users like
I don't personally like Apple products enough to own them, other than an iPod Touch I got from work, but they do get plenty of things right. There is however no question that Apple charges a significant premium on their products; the old joke is "everyone buys two, so if you have a problem the first replacement is free, no questions asked." To suggest that they're "largely the same value for money" is stupid and insulting to anyone that can do math. Let me go over it again:
MacBook Air 13: $1300, Acer V7-482PG-9884: $1300
On the Apple side: Build quality: minor win for Apple; let's be generous and call it $100 256GB SSD: $100 more than 24GB + 1TB HDD Thunderbolt: $50 (again, being more than generous) +$250 relative value
On the Acer side: Better 1080p AHVA LCD: $75 more than 1400x900 TN Touchscreen: $100 extra Faster i7 CPU: $150 more than i5-4250U GT 750M: $100 add on +$425 in relative value (BoM costs)
So right there, with some math that's very kind to Apple, we have at least a $175 additional profit margin for the MacBook Air 13 (upgraded model). If we were to go through all of the components for both laptops and figure out a realistic BoM, I figure Apple's total profit margin on the upgraded MBA13 is roughly twice what Acer makes off the V7-482PG. And yet, Apple will sell 10X or maybe even 100X MBA13 as Acer will of the V7-482PG.
Oh, but to suggest that Apple can charge more because they're Apple is stupid and insulting. I forgot.
It's a bit silly to add after Jarred's clear (and snarky) response, but any discussion of "value" has to bear in mind that many factors that influence value are subjective. On the Apple front in particular, I was in the market for a 13" laptop recently and strongly considered the MBA, thanks largely to touchpad quality, plus the unique availability of HD5000 vs. HD4400 in all the available ultrabooks. However, for me, shipping OSX is mostly a downside--it adds the cost of a Windows license to my purchase, not to mention a nonstandard keyboard layout under Windows.
So value is in the eye of the beholder. The fact that Macs have higher profit margins than most Windows boxes is not an insult to Mac users; it just means that Mac users are willing to pay more money for less hardware, in order to get the other benefits of owning a Mac. Life would be simpler if Apple fanboys (really, fanboys of all stripes) would be a little less touchy about perceived attacks on themselves or their company.
To me, the only strong value proposition involved with a Macbook is the fact that after 2-3 years of use someone's likely to pay me 2-3x for it what an equivalent Windows laptop PC would be worth at that point... Resale value's not enough of a reason for me to deal with bootcamp etc tho. They're nice systems and all, just not for me.
I'm not sure when companies started deserving higher margins or not or howthis somehow became a moral issue... Brand recognition and PR (backed up by solid build quality) sells and can easily inflate a product's worth, don't be naive and try to pretend otherwise.
There is no shame in charging extra for the brand. If you truly believe that your company makes premium products, then you must price accordingly. You may buy macs for their technical nuances and exclusivities, but I'm afraid you're in the minority. So, unless you need OSX, you're relatively paying more for less; Jarred above me is right.
The Canadian model of the V7 is far better in terms of price point. As for Apple, they will always be "pay more for less". Also, battery life would last longer if the extra diagnostics were turned off, since Windows continually writes that info to disk. It's for enterprise/network use (which is something Apple doesn't have to worry about).
Is it possible to easily swap out the 24GB SSD Cache on this model with a Samsung 840 EVO 256GB SSD, using it as the primary drive for the OS and apps, and reserving the HDD for documents?
From the hardware side, it's easy. On the software side, you'll basically want to do a clean install of the OS and you wouldn't want ExpressCache running as you would have no need for it. For most of our readers, I'd guess doing a clean Win8 install is simple enough, particularly if they're willing to open up the laptop and replace the mSATA drive in the first place. :-)
Their "Light" battery test is not the same test that we use, nor is it at the same brightness setting. The MacBook Air 13 Haswell model gets 11.03 hours while loading four web pages every 60 seconds with the LCD at ~200 nits. They measured 12.68 hours of battery life doing what? "The light-use test is the absolute longest you can expect the battery to last with careful power management." That sounds like they're doing nothing, equivalent to our old "Idle" battery life testing from last year, and possibly at minimum brightness.
We haven't been doing Idle testing for 2013, but on laptops tested previously idle battery life was typically 20% to as much as 40% more than what we got on our Internet testing. Our new Light test is our old Internet test with the LCD at 200 nits, so basically take the MBA13 result and multiply by at least 1.2 to be fair, and possibly as much as 1.4. That means the MBA13 under OS X while idle could easily hit 15+ hours, which would be more than any Windows laptop manages with a similar size battery.
Basically, you have to make sure you're comparing apples to apples when it comes to battery life testing. If a site doesn't completely document how they're testing, you can't do that.
Since these don't seem to be available/on display in store anywhere, I want to get some idea of what they feel like before I take the plunge and get one. Are there any Acers (or other laptops) with a similar keyboard feel that are widely available in store; I just want to make sure that the low travel is ok.
This PC shows why 16:9 screens are bad. I'm writing this comment on an old 16:10 laptop which is as wide as this new Acer and guess? My screen is 15" thanks to all those extra vertical pixels.
There are two extra downsides of this PC: the memory limit at 12 GB (why not two 8+8 GB unsoldered slots? For the extra thinness? Who cares!) and the glossy screen. So even if the keyboard and the touchpad turn to be super we are left with a subpar screen and constrained memory. The rotational disk would be OK if it can be upgraded later on.
A good attempt but please try again. Hint: just clone the 16:10 matte MBP 15" and perfect it by letting people upgrade its parts.
While I'm sure Microsoft is pushing for manufacturers to include touchscreens; it adds NO value right now. So the problem then becomes, if you include a touchscreen you can't charge for it. Which means reduced margins. I'm certainly not going to pay for it. This thing is at least $100 too expensive.
Looks like a good machine though, if I could find it on sale for 1K I'd probably buy it.
My laptop died and thought of upgrading to the acer v7
The question is: i do design on my laptop, both 2d (photoshop, vectorial, animation, video editing) as well as 3d (from cad to maya/max). This is the first mainstream laptop i see with a decent dedicated graphic solution, and since i also do photo retouching you pretty much sold me on the screen. I travel a lot and the v7 is light and has the perfect screen format for me. It's also 1000eur in europe, wich is a really good price for this kind of product.
The problem is the i5 cpu. I've had a first gen i7 (i think 720 qm) quad core cpu for the past years and it was enough for me. But i'm scared that the acer v7 will actually offer worse performance with its 4th gen dual core i5 than my old laptop. Am i right to be worried? And would an i7 4500u actually be much better, even though that's also a dual core? It's gettong very hard to find quad core cpus in the 2kg weight range.
I found this at best buy (Canada) for only $850, seems like a total steal. My only concern is how reliable Acer is in terms of customer service, and more importantly if the warranty is any good, but otherwise I'm very surprised that no one seems to have heard about it. http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/acer-acer-v7-1...
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
Back to Article
slawkenbergius - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Could you post a copy of your .icc for this screen for download?cheinonen - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
If you'd like a nice article on why simply copying settings, or an .icc file, won't really help, you can read this piece:http://www.tlvexp.ca/2012/12/the-fruits-of-copying...
This is why I don't post settings or files with display reviews. There are too many variables involved to know if it is helping or hurting.
JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
What Chris said, but if you want to try them, I made two: one with "native" white levels and one targeting D65. Download them both here:images.anandtech.com/reviews/mobile/2013/Acer-V7-LCD.zip
The "Native" is less accurate but you don't lose maximum brightness, which can be important on a laptop.
fabarati - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
That's not quite an accurate comparison when it comes to laptops. The out of the box calibration on laptops is generally so bad that even copied settings offer you much improved performance. Especially since there are no OSD controls and it's all done in software. You just have to make sure that it is, in fact, the same panel.kevin_newell - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Either way, it doesn't change the fact that there are a lot better options on the market. /Kevin from http://www.consumertop.com/best-laptop-guide/hybrid2d4x4 - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I winced at reading the part about "Torx screw silliness". What would you have preferred? The ubiquitous, shitty philips-head screws that cam out and are a massive pain in the ass to remove if overtorqued? I think that using torx deserves praise, not criticism.Kill16by9TN - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I wholeheartedly second that!kevith - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
In deed, yes!kallogan - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I love Torx screwsijozic - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
+1 as I recently had to disassemble my old Dell Precision and one of the screws was too tight so it got damaged (the screw head hole is shallow compared to the screwdriver) and it starts to become almost impossible to remove (have to use a flat head screwdriver, but there's less and less to grab on).Regarding the side button issue, when I use an external display with my Precision, I often wish it had a side button to turn it on..
JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The "silliness" was more in reference to the hidden torx screws under the pads. Let me clarify that in the text.evilspoons - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Yes! Torx screws are better given the same physical size, and the screwdrivers aren't exactly expensive or anything. I'd much rather have to spend an extra five minutes finding a Torx driver than strip out a friggin' Philips.KaarlisK - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
In 2011, I bought a laptop that weights 1.7kg and has a 35W TDP CPU, and as a result, the CPU and the integrated graphics could actually both boost at the same time.Now we're being offered 1.9-2.5 kilo laptops with 17W CPUs and rather inconsistent performance, especially in games.
It seems silly, especially since the idle power consumption is the mostly same and the prices, at least for Ivy Bridge, were mostly similar.
mtoma - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I think Jarred (and many other ethusiasts) have huge expectations from the displays. Sure, everybody wants 1080p (or higher) IPS displays, but at what cost? Let's not forget that many people don't have many thousands of dollars per month in order to afford such beautiful displays/products. For example, why should'nt be enough an 720p or IPS panel on a 14 or 15 inch laptop? I remember back in 2007 I had an 15,6 inch Fujitsu laptop with a 1280x800 pixels. It wasn't great at all, but it was getting the work done. Remember, a greater display resolution demands much more from the graphichs, and that leads to bigger power consumption. More doesn't always mean better.Regards,
KaarlisK - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
A better display is simply _the_ worthwhile upgrade in the era of "good enough" computing.I have a Sandy i3 laptop and a Core 2 Duo desktop, and since I do not much game (or convert videos/run scientific simulations), I still do not feel a need to upgrade my CPU (I do have fast storage and lots of RAM).
More and more I've been catching myself on the thought that my next upgrade might be a ~24'' monitor with high DPI, if one arrives for a reasonable price. With the laptop it is similar – it does everything it is asked to, so the only incentive to upgrade is either a way better screen (better colors and high DPI), or the same performance and OS support in a tablet/phone sized package.
sheh - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Nevermind the resolution, a poor TN is a horrible thing. I'd want laptop makers to use *decent* TNs as minimum, though really I'd prefer something better than TN (with decent response pixel times).I recently got an Asus 15.6" laptop (500-600$ in the US). The TN screen is horrendous. The specs say it's something like 15+30 degrees vertically, but that's a lie. It's more like 0 degrees. There's no single angle where you can see the whole screen undistorted. Maybe if you watch it from 2-3 meter away. Horizontal angles aren't good either, but are less of a problem. I wonder why they don't rotate the panel 90 degrees, as vertical is more important in laptops. The 6-bit dithering is not difficult to notice. The pixel response time isn't too good. And looking at technical specs, it seems there are even worse TN screens being made!
Now, you can get such panels on eBay for about $50. That's for a very poor 6-bit 1366x768 TN. For $150 you can get a 15.6" 1920x1080 S-IPS 10-bit. $100 difference in end user price going from super poor to very good:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-15-6-Laptop-LCD-Screen...
You can probably find decent 6-bit 1366x768 IPSes for less than $100.
sheh - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
BTW, I didn't say anything about contrast because I don't know what it is. The contrast is variable across the screen (mostly vertically), as are the colors (is this pink or orange? is it dark purple or light? is there a vertical gradient here or is it a solid color?).Pfffman - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I don't think Jarred expects people to buy laptops monthly let alone every year so investing in a nicer screen is still reasonable.When the asking price for the laptop is $1300, 1080 would seem to be expected. Touch is a nice extra. Generally Anandtech will scale their screen expectations according to price. They do have a high emphasis on screen though. They generally only okay TN panels if they are the really good ones or the laptop is clearly budget targeted.
In this time, it might be hard to get a 1280x720 or 1280x800 IPS screen at 14 inch. The panel manufacturers might not bother with it any more.
piroroadkill - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
While your old laptop may have had a crap display - many others had old laptops which did not. I have a laptop from 2004~ that has a 15" 1920x1200 screen, a Dell Precision which also has a 15" 1920x1200 screen, an old Dell with a 1400x1050 14".. etc.My favourite laptop and the one I'm on right now is a Sony Vaio Z12, 13.3" 1600x900, and so light. But I added the previous examples to show that some people have ALREADY had higher res screens, and are bewildered that options lack today.
I think the screen on this particular Acer is probably just fine - once calibrated, so they probably should do that from the factory - but I honestly would love to drop the touchscreen entirely, and have a matte finish. But that's me. It would even save some money.
dareo - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
"The V7-582PG-6421 has a 15.6” 1080p IPS display, but the CPU is a Core i5-4200U and the GPU is a rather questionable GT 720M"I've been considering this model mainly because of the larger display, which only adds 0.5 lbs to the weight, and my eyes aren’t what they used to be so the extra screen real estate is needed. It would be great if it were as light as some previous generations of the Samsung Series 9, but you can’t have everything.
Taking into account the following use cases, will the lower CPU & GPU specs on the 6421 really make a difference to me?:
At home office (connected to an external 24” monitor):
- Word, Excel, Powerpoint
- email
- web browsing
- occasional hobbyist use of 3D Home Architect
On the road:
- Word, Excel, Powerpoint
- email
- web browsing
- watching videos on flights
While display size at home is irrelevant since I have the external monitor, I find that my current laptop with a 13.3” display doesn’t cut it (for me) on the road when working with the MS-Office suite. Since the laptop is nearly 4 years old and starting to give me some problems, the timing of the new Haswell-based laptops is spot on and I’m looking to get one by the end of the year. Right now there just doesn’t seem to be too many options for a new generation (processor & touchscreen) 15” minimal-compromise ultrabook at a decent price. Calling the V7-582PG-6421 an ultrabook might be a stretch, but it weights the same as my current smaller-screen laptop so it’s acceptable.
Should I be waiting for something else that’s just on the horizon? Are there other alternatives to the V7-582PG-6421 that I should be considering?
lmcd - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I'd personally bet you don't even need the dGPU. I'd consider picking up an ultrabook with the right size screen and screen res.I can't judge 3D Home Architect but based on what I'm seeing it seems legacy. I think iGPU graphics should handle it just fine, and again, a dGPU would be wasted.
I'd strongly recommend picking a Haswell-only model, though I'd consider waiting to see what Haswell with Iris HD Pro brings (power consumption).
One last question though: what screen res is that 24 inch monitor? 1920x1080 will be fine (and I don't think much else exists at that screen size) but I wonder how well 1440p would run off an iGPU (probably not that well).
JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Yeah, what lmcd said. For the applications you're running, the dGPU isn't needed -- it's just taking space and perhaps a little bit of power. I'd estimate the 720M is only about 30-50% faster than the HD 4400, so if you could get something with HD 5000 the gap would be even smaller. We've got a laptop with Iris Pro 5200 Graphics inbound, but the cost may be too high relative to Optimus models to make it worthwhile.Of course, if you can't find another laptop with a decent 1080p display for less than $1050, the 15.6" V7 isn't terrible -- it's just not as good (IMO) as the smaller V7.
Bob Todd - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I'm assuming that's a 47W quad you've got coming from the SKUs I've seen, but any insights into when we'll see the dual core 28W HD 5100 parts? My wallet is begging to be abused by a very portable machine that can last 12 hours in light duty and still play most current games (~720p/low). Preferably before my next flight to India :/.dareo - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
Thanks for the feedback. Since I'm giving myself to the end of the year for making the purchase, I'll throw this one into the spreadsheet that I'm using for evaluating alternatives.dareo - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The monitor res is 1920x1080 as you suspected which, for what I do, is just fine.I'd agree that the iGPU is fine for 90% of what I do so that definitely makes it good enough. Nevertheless, that last 10% (3D Home Architect) can be frustrating at times. My current laptop has a Core i5 M430 and a GeForce 310M. Doing a 3D walkthrough of complex drawings is very choppy.
rootheday - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
Based on the benchmarks at notebookcheck.net, haswell iGpu in ultrabook 15w skus (hd4200, hd4400) are about 2x the performance of the 310m.powerfox - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
According to various things I've read online, that port on the back may or may not be a Mini DisplayPort. Are you able to test if it is and if 2560x1440 output is possible? I've been considering this computer, but connecting it to my U2711 is important to me. Thanks.JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Sadly, I don't even had a DisplayPort capable LCD, let alone one with 1440p support. I've been using a couple older 30" DL-DVI displays for years, and have no reason to upgrade yet (and no space for another display). Acer calls it a mini-VGA, but you need an adapter for that, and apparently they also support a few other things with the port via adapters. But they do not guarantee displays will work. This is all based on information from the R7 though -- they don't have a spec sheet for the V7 posted yet, oddly enough.http://acer.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3...
hfm - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Personally, for gaming, moving away from native resolution is the worst thing you can do. The Razer 14 even with it's questionable panel is in a different league for gaming concerns.davejake - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Jarred, your reviews are the only ones I've really come to trust as I'm shopping for a new laptop. Thanks for the level-headed subjective analysis combined with the well-analyzed raw data. Whatever compensation you get for doing these reviews... it should be more!The only thing that is stopping me from snagging this laptop right now is that the specs on the (ever?) forthcoming Gigabyte p34g and p35k look compelling-- like the V7 on steroids without the touchscreen. What's the "major flaw" that you're concerned about with those? I, and I'm guessing many others, would be interested in your assessment. I'm guessing price, heat, battery life, and availability are the likely "gotchas." Thanks!
JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Build quality is an unknown, as is battery life and some other factors, but the bigger issue is that you just can't get it yet, at least in the US. I need to ping Gigabyte and see what's up, as the only place I can find it in the US says, "This product is not available and cannot be purchased. It has been discontinued by the manufacturer or vendor." But it might simply be in the pre-release phase.GrammarNietzsche - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The "major flaw" with the P34G seems to be its TN panel. source: http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/laptops/1300168/gig...You can also see the color shift on YouTube videos of the P34G.
davejake - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The Gigabyte specs page claims it to be 1080p AHVA (~IPS)http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx...
This might be another obnoxious case of the various country models being different.
Also, thanks Jarred for the response. The "Gigabyte NB" facebook page keeps talking about early september availability for the p34g-- later for the the p35k-- but I'm trying to not hold my breath.
Samunosuke - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Been looking forward to this review ever since you mentioned it was coming, in your R7 review. I believe this particular SKU is seriously overpriced. The model available on the US ncix website comes with an i5-4200U, GT 750m 4GB,same 1080p IPS touchscreen and 500GB + 24GB storage for $899. To me this is a far better value proposition than the $1300 model. The i5 might be a bottleneck in some games but its not going to be too different from the i7.Comparing this to the Asus N550 and I feel that the N550JV-DB72T is a far better deal with an i7-4700HQ, same GT 750m (2GB), 1080p IPS touchscreen,all aluminum body, max 16GB RAM and 3 USB 3.0 ports. Although the Acer has an msata slot for ssd's, the Asus has an optical drive where the mechanical drive can be put while a 2.5" ssd occupies the main HDD slot. Weight and thickness favour the Acer but I'm willing to accept that. The Acer is $1066 for the touchscreen version and $969 for the matte non touch. Absolute no brainer.
JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The ASUS N550 does weigh about 1.5 pounds more, let's not forget that, and it looks like the same basic design as the N56JV, which was good but still rather bulky, with more plastic in the chassis. If you're after something with higher performance than the V7, there are many options out there; if you want what is basically a gaming Ultrabook that can handle any moderate task you might throw at it, I think the V7-482PG strikes a nice balance. I would like to have the option for a 1080p matte non-touch if it could save $150, but sadly there isn't one.Funny enough, the NCIX version of the V7 is apparently a Canadian model (http://store.acer.com/store/acerna/en_CA/pd/ThemeI... This is one of the frustrating things with Acer, ASUS, and a lot of other OEMs: they have good SKUs that are only released in specific markets, and often I can't figure out why. I've never tried ordering from NCIX before, but for $899 (though it's backordered), the V7-482PG-6662 is basically giving you a slower CPU, smaller HDD and less RAM for $400 less. Of course, that's a "street price" and I suspect the 9884 street prices might end up in the $1100-$1200 range, making it a more reasonable upgrade.
GrammarNietzsche - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The 9884 is available on the US NCIX site as well. I couldn't link it in this comment, so you'll have to remove the (dot)http://us.ncix(dot)com/products/?sku=83180&vpn...
JBaich - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Congrats to Acer for reversing course on the "race to the bottom". RTTBSadly, it might be another 10 years for me before the name Acer doesn't resonate with garbage. They will, and should, suffer for a build-em-and-sell-em-cheap strategy. I'm not convinced.
Anonymous1a - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I was wondering, given that the processor, despite being an i7, is still a ULT processor, and not even a quad-core, will this not be a limiting factor to the graphics card and will this laptop be able to render graphically challenging games?JarredWalton - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
The majority of games still don't really need more than one or two CPU cores, and with Turbo Boost you're still able to hit 2.7-3.0GHz on the i7-4500U. With a faster GPU it would be more of a bottleneck, but the GT 750M is clearly tapped out in most titles already, at least at our Mainstream settings. (You'll notice that overclocking the GPU RAM didn't help on the Value settings, but that could be more the GPU core not needing more RAM than a CPU bottleneck; I'd have to investigate more to say for certain.) I think a GTX 765M would probably be where we see the shift to being CPU bound with a ULT processor, but even then you can usually get >40FPS from the CPU if the GPU can manage, so you can turn up details to compensate if you had a faster GPU.This is where the MSI GX60 runs into problems with some games, as single-threaded performance of the A10 APUs is still significantly slower than even the ULV/ULT parts. It's pretty sad that an Ultrabook with a much slower GPU can outperform it in several of the games, even at Mainstream detail.
just2btecky - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
Acer Aspire V7-482PG-9884 has a funky name I'll never remember. I aspire:) for a name that's really cute.tackle70 - Saturday, August 24, 2013 - link
I guess I'm just a computing dinosaur... I do almost all my work on desktops, and while I love a laptop as a backup portable work/netflix/whatever box, I just can't stomach the thought of spending $1k+ on one.My 2.5 year old $450 HP Probook 4430s may have a fugly screen and not be the thinnest or fastest thing out there, but I can't see replacing it anytime soon for how I need to use a laptop.
Impulses - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
Guess that makes me a bit of a dinosaur too... Or just a geek and a gamer, I've been thinking of getting a laptop for a while to replace an aging netbook but between my desktop and my tablet I tend to use the netbook a whole lot less than I used to...And I wouldn't be happy with a budget laptop (let alone another netbook) if it weighed half a dozen pounds or had a crap screen (not after getting 3x24" IPS displays for the desktop and looking at the new Nexus 7 display...). Work needs might eventually force my hand tho, and while I'd like a system like this Acer I'd probably opt for something slightly cheaper/lighter without a dGPU.
et20 - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
Good review. Thank you.Please stop saying "the only company that can get away with charging Apple prices is Apple".
It's stupid and insulting.
It's insulting to Acer and the other manufacturers to imply that they don't deserve proper margins for developing good products.
It's insulting to consumers to imply that most of them are not discerning enough to pay what a good product is worth.
It's insulting to Apple to imply that they somehow "get away" with making more than subsistence profits for building good products.
It's insulting to Apple product users to imply that they're been fooled into paying more than rock bottom prices for good products.
So just stop with this BS and admit that Mac and PC hardware offer largely the same value for money.
JarredWalton - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
You can say "it's insulting" all you want, but that doesn't make it true. The reasons for why Apple can charge more are numerous, but just to cover a few:1) Brand recognition
2) Good products
3) Unique OS
4) An ecosystem that many users like
I don't personally like Apple products enough to own them, other than an iPod Touch I got from work, but they do get plenty of things right. There is however no question that Apple charges a significant premium on their products; the old joke is "everyone buys two, so if you have a problem the first replacement is free, no questions asked." To suggest that they're "largely the same value for money" is stupid and insulting to anyone that can do math. Let me go over it again:
MacBook Air 13: $1300, Acer V7-482PG-9884: $1300
On the Apple side:
Build quality: minor win for Apple; let's be generous and call it $100
256GB SSD: $100 more than 24GB + 1TB HDD
Thunderbolt: $50 (again, being more than generous)
+$250 relative value
On the Acer side:
Better 1080p AHVA LCD: $75 more than 1400x900 TN
Touchscreen: $100 extra
Faster i7 CPU: $150 more than i5-4250U
GT 750M: $100 add on
+$425 in relative value (BoM costs)
So right there, with some math that's very kind to Apple, we have at least a $175 additional profit margin for the MacBook Air 13 (upgraded model). If we were to go through all of the components for both laptops and figure out a realistic BoM, I figure Apple's total profit margin on the upgraded MBA13 is roughly twice what Acer makes off the V7-482PG. And yet, Apple will sell 10X or maybe even 100X MBA13 as Acer will of the V7-482PG.
Oh, but to suggest that Apple can charge more because they're Apple is stupid and insulting. I forgot.
teiglin - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
It's a bit silly to add after Jarred's clear (and snarky) response, but any discussion of "value" has to bear in mind that many factors that influence value are subjective. On the Apple front in particular, I was in the market for a 13" laptop recently and strongly considered the MBA, thanks largely to touchpad quality, plus the unique availability of HD5000 vs. HD4400 in all the available ultrabooks. However, for me, shipping OSX is mostly a downside--it adds the cost of a Windows license to my purchase, not to mention a nonstandard keyboard layout under Windows.So value is in the eye of the beholder. The fact that Macs have higher profit margins than most Windows boxes is not an insult to Mac users; it just means that Mac users are willing to pay more money for less hardware, in order to get the other benefits of owning a Mac. Life would be simpler if Apple fanboys (really, fanboys of all stripes) would be a little less touchy about perceived attacks on themselves or their company.
Impulses - Wednesday, August 28, 2013 - link
To me, the only strong value proposition involved with a Macbook is the fact that after 2-3 years of use someone's likely to pay me 2-3x for it what an equivalent Windows laptop PC would be worth at that point... Resale value's not enough of a reason for me to deal with bootcamp etc tho. They're nice systems and all, just not for me.I'm not sure when companies started deserving higher margins or not or howthis somehow became a moral issue... Brand recognition and PR (backed up by solid build quality) sells and can easily inflate a product's worth, don't be naive and try to pretend otherwise.
ananduser - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - link
There is no shame in charging extra for the brand. If you truly believe that your company makes premium products, then you must price accordingly. You may buy macs for their technical nuances and exclusivities, but I'm afraid you're in the minority. So, unless you need OSX, you're relatively paying more for less; Jarred above me is right.joe_dude - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
The Canadian model of the V7 is far better in terms of price point. As for Apple, they will always be "pay more for less". Also, battery life would last longer if the extra diagnostics were turned off, since Windows continually writes that info to disk. It's for enterprise/network use (which is something Apple doesn't have to worry about).dareo - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
Is it possible to easily swap out the 24GB SSD Cache on this model with a Samsung 840 EVO 256GB SSD, using it as the primary drive for the OS and apps, and reserving the HDD for documents?JarredWalton - Monday, August 26, 2013 - link
From the hardware side, it's easy. On the software side, you'll basically want to do a clean install of the OS and you wouldn't want ExpressCache running as you would have no need for it. For most of our readers, I'd guess doing a clean Win8 install is simple enough, particularly if they're willing to open up the laptop and replace the mSATA drive in the first place. :-)damianrobertjones - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
"I’m frequently amazed at how much better battery life is with Apple hardware under OS X" - I didn't see this in the last gen of macbooksI hope that this machine, as well as the Sony, is mentioned in future battery sections as the Mac DOES NOT PROVIDE the best battery life.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/laptops/383785/dell...
JarredWalton - Tuesday, August 27, 2013 - link
Their "Light" battery test is not the same test that we use, nor is it at the same brightness setting. The MacBook Air 13 Haswell model gets 11.03 hours while loading four web pages every 60 seconds with the LCD at ~200 nits. They measured 12.68 hours of battery life doing what? "The light-use test is the absolute longest you can expect the battery to last with careful power management." That sounds like they're doing nothing, equivalent to our old "Idle" battery life testing from last year, and possibly at minimum brightness.We haven't been doing Idle testing for 2013, but on laptops tested previously idle battery life was typically 20% to as much as 40% more than what we got on our Internet testing. Our new Light test is our old Internet test with the LCD at 200 nits, so basically take the MBA13 result and multiply by at least 1.2 to be fair, and possibly as much as 1.4. That means the MBA13 under OS X while idle could easily hit 15+ hours, which would be more than any Windows laptop manages with a similar size battery.
Basically, you have to make sure you're comparing apples to apples when it comes to battery life testing. If a site doesn't completely document how they're testing, you can't do that.
willstay - Wednesday, August 28, 2013 - link
"Anand didn’t test Windows battery life with the new MBA13" - I wish he did. No one has done it with MBA13 yet.ihleonard - Saturday, August 31, 2013 - link
Since these don't seem to be available/on display in store anywhere, I want to get some idea of what they feel like before I take the plunge and get one. Are there any Acers (or other laptops) with a similar keyboard feel that are widely available in store; I just want to make sure that the low travel is ok.Thanks
Otunia - Monday, September 2, 2013 - link
This PC shows why 16:9 screens are bad. I'm writing this comment on an old 16:10 laptop which is as wide as this new Acer and guess? My screen is 15" thanks to all those extra vertical pixels.There are two extra downsides of this PC: the memory limit at 12 GB (why not two 8+8 GB unsoldered slots? For the extra thinness? Who cares!) and the glossy screen. So even if the keyboard and the touchpad turn to be super we are left with a subpar screen and constrained memory. The rotational disk would be OK if it can be upgraded later on.
A good attempt but please try again. Hint: just clone the 16:10 matte MBP 15" and perfect it by letting people upgrade its parts.
Hrel - Tuesday, September 3, 2013 - link
While I'm sure Microsoft is pushing for manufacturers to include touchscreens; it adds NO value right now. So the problem then becomes, if you include a touchscreen you can't charge for it. Which means reduced margins. I'm certainly not going to pay for it. This thing is at least $100 too expensive.Looks like a good machine though, if I could find it on sale for 1K I'd probably buy it.
ziotoo - Sunday, September 8, 2013 - link
Hey jared (or any v7 owner)My laptop died and thought of upgrading to the acer v7
The question is: i do design on my laptop, both 2d (photoshop, vectorial, animation, video editing) as well as 3d (from cad to maya/max). This is the first mainstream laptop i see with a decent dedicated graphic solution, and since i also do photo retouching you pretty much sold me on the screen. I travel a lot and the v7 is light and has the perfect screen format for me. It's also 1000eur in europe, wich is a really good price for this kind of product.
The problem is the i5 cpu. I've had a first gen i7 (i think 720 qm) quad core cpu for the past years and it was enough for me. But i'm scared that the acer v7 will actually offer worse performance with its 4th gen dual core i5 than my old laptop. Am i right to be worried? And would an i7 4500u actually be much better, even though that's also a dual core? It's gettong very hard to find quad core cpus in the 2kg weight range.
Thanks a lot.
ziotoo - Sunday, September 8, 2013 - link
Forgot to add: the 14 inch configuration in europe only sports an i5. The rest is unchangedhellermercer - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link
I need powerfull speakers!!!!hellermercer - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link
I need powerfull speakers!!!!Yoshibear123 - Wednesday, January 29, 2014 - link
I found this at best buy (Canada) for only $850, seems like a total steal. My only concern is how reliable Acer is in terms of customer service, and more importantly if the warranty is any good, but otherwise I'm very surprised that no one seems to have heard about it.http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/acer-acer-v7-1...
Yoshibear123 - Wednesday, January 29, 2014 - link
http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/acer-acer-v7-1...